Monday, July 19, 2010

David Wood's Arrest at Dearborn Arab Festival

According to Dearborn Mayor John C. O'Reilly:

At the time he was arrested on Friday, June 18, Mr. Wood had gathered a large crowd around him, blocking a key access point between the tents. The crowd was forced to grow bigger solely because people could not pass. Those who created this public danger did so with the knowledge that they were violating the laws because they wanted to be arrested while their cohorts were actively recording the event for posting on the web. They knew that they could inflame the passions of viewers who would be taken in by their misrepresentation of what was really going on. Source.

Fortunately, video footage trumps the Mayor's lies. Pay close attention to the Muslim who says, "Man I love Dearborn Police." (I'll note here, however, that this could be a sarcastic comment. I can't be sure, but given the number of Muslims who cheered at our arrests, I suspect the intention was genuine.)

And here's what happened according to the City of Dearborn's website:

Public safety became an issue for both members of Acts 17 Apologetics and the gathering crowd. The four (4) members of Acts 17 Apologetics chose to escalate their behavior, which appeared well-orchestrated and deliberate, and chose not to follow the directions being given to them by the responding officers. The behavior of these individuals drew and incited a large crowd to a point where they were in violation of City of Dearborn Misdemeanor Ordinances of Breach of Peace and Failure to Obey the Lawful Order of a Police Officer. They were arrested. Upon their arrest, the crowd dispersed without further action being needed. Source.

Thanks for the new footage guys! I know that editing the film takes time and energy, keep up the good work! People everywhere who love freedom are watching these videos and getting riled up. When they see what happened to you they will want to speak up about it and won't let it die until justice returns to America!

Dearborn police seems to have been bribed which is a very common thing in muslim countries. As i always say trouble follows wherever islam goes and i will not keep bribery out of it. If dearborn police was not bribed to arrest christians then why would they go against the US constitution. Mr mayor please resign cause by lying you are no more qualified to be public representative.

What a AWFUL SITUATION that the Dearborn Police and the MAYOR got in. They must be having meetings right now to find a ANOTHER GOOD REASON for your arrest. They must be BUSY in cooking something to save their faces. I would love to see their faces right now.

PLease, take your cameras to the COURT we cant afford to miss the end of the story.

John C. O'Reilly, sharia law enforcement leader Haddad and his troops need to pack up and move to Saudi Arabia, or to Afghanistan and join the Taliban where they can safely enforce their oppressive Islamic ideology.

I love the "huge crowd" so big no one could get past, nothing like the facts of a video showing about 10 or 11 people around one person and people passing around this tiny gathering easily. I have seen larger gatherings when my family gets together for a picnic...that is at least over 11 people hanging out. How utterly foolish the Dearborn authorities are beginning to look. If I were them I would begin to be concerned for bad press and tourism. After all it will be a very cold day in a very hot place before I take my children anywhere near that place. If they go forward with this trial and if it goes national there are going to be a bunch of families that are going to say the same thing.

BTW I liked the "Liar Liar pants on fire" joke because it emphasizes the childish behavior of the Dearborn authorities to result to lying when they get caught doing something wrong. It made me smile David!

The video evidence so completely refutes all charges against Acts 17 that I keep wondering what can be in the mind of the city officials that they are continuing to press charges. What can they be thinking not to drop charges?

I have had a thought so cynical that I hesitate to think that it could be true: Could it be that they are planning to have officers perjure themselves and are counting on a Dearborn jury that will convict no matter what, in defiance of all the video evidence? (I assume that this would be a jury trial. But if it were a trial by a single judge, so much the easier for them, I suppose.)

"If we drop the charges due to lack of evidence, we're admitting that the arrests were unlawful to begin with. This opens the door for a civil lawsuit. Thus, we have to move forward with the charges. But we have no evidence, and so our desperation becomes all the more evident."

In other words, they're in trouble either way. If they continue with the court hearings, it's more obvious that they really are out to get us. But if they drop the charges, they're getting sued in a major way. Lose-lose.

Brian, from the evidence that we have seen, there is no doubt that David and Nabeel's civil rights were violated. That being said, there's no need to take cheap shots at the attire of anyone. That just makes you look immature

David,Why is the mayor publicly committing himself to statements that are so obviously refuted by your videos? Isn't he shooting himself in the foot that way? Is it possible he has never seen your videos, and has incompetent or lying witnesses and advisers feeding him erroneous explanations of what took place with Acts 17 at the festival? Why would he intentionally and publicly lie, when there is video evidence to refute such lies?

David or Nabeel, could you create a separate blog post where you'd list your appearances on various radio shows, podcasts, etc. with links included? I've been able to locate some but don't know if I'm missing others. This would be a useful resource for those who are following this case.

David, I hear you bro about the city being in a no-win situation, which is why they are continuing to press charges. However, how about you guys guarantee them that you won't bring a civil suit if they drop the charges? That seems a Christlike thing to do - at least you can make the offer. The point that their actions are dead wrong has already been made by the videos, the people are already with you!

I've been continually amazed at the, "They must be doing something wrong or this wouldn't have happened," assumptions of so many of the Christians who are trying to interpret these events. And I was just appalled at the Josh McDowell ("The time of our lives"!!!) which seemed to imply that, if the Acts 17 Christians weren't spoiling for a fight, they would've been welcomed with open arms and smiling faces.

Don't Christians realize how much more threatened and hostile Muslims would feel toward former Muslim converts to Christianity (as well as the people they hold responsible for converting them) than they would towards someone like Josh McDowell, who wouldn't seem even remotely threatening to them?

Abdul Asad, it would be folly for Acts 17 to make any such "deal." You should realize what would happen in that case: The city would just go on arresting Acts 17 if they had such conversations at the festival in future years. Dropping the charges doesn't mean they won't do it again! The point isn't just to "make the point" that they were wrong. The point is to get them to _stop doing this_.

Let's face it: The city wishes it could make the following rule--"No Christians having conversations with Muslims at the Arab festival except at booths." Except they know that any such rule, if actually written down or said in so many words, is blatantly unconstitutional, six ways from zero. So they just make it an _unwritten_ and _unstated_ rule and arrest Acts 17 for violating it, hoping eventually to harass Christians enough that they will all obey this unwritten rule. This is overwhelmingly clear both from last year's events and from this year's events.

to Abdul, yes the guys could promise to not sue the city for false arrest, but at the same time as a Christian we are bound to uphold the laws of the land, thus as the city has abused the laws of said land, it is up to Christians to stand up to ensure the city is made an example of and to ensure the city henceforth follows the laws of the land. But in a respectful way, which I know the good act 17 people will do.

Abdul Asad saidHow about you guys guarantee them that you won't bring a civil suit if they drop the charges? That seems a Christlike thing to do - at least you can make the offer!

David, if I may respond to this taqeya offer. LOL

Abdul Asad,This has nothing to do with being a Christian or Christ like, or being unchristian. This is Islamic jihad and sharia that does not conform to our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. It’s all about these basic citizen’s rights and freedoms, VS. corrupt government officials, who violate these Constitutional Rights. Certainly if the wheels were turned around and the victims in this case are Muslims you would not even pull this “Christ Like” card.Acts 17 were forgiving last year, and that did not work with Islamic Sharia, or Muslims in general.

Also in response to the Abdul's suggestion-- I am not sure how the law reads, but in some situations the offer to not pursue a civil suit in the effort to get charges dropped could be construed as attempting to bribe an official. I am sure that the city of Dearborn would like nothing better than to have something that might actually stick to charge the 4 of them with. So I would not recommend even offering that.

They put their hands on my 18-year-old sister in Christ. They put her in handcuffs and hauled her off to jail. Do you really think the "Christian" thing to do is let them get away with it, teaching them that it's okay to do this to Christian girls???

Brother David, the evidence is clear and compelling, yet I cannot help but predict that the judge who has already shown a negative bias in your initial meeting will find an exit clause for the Dearborne Police. My question is this, how far are you willing to take this case? Lawsuits are not cheap.

Faisalabad, 20 July (AKI) - Two brothers were shot dead outside a courtroom in the Pakistani's Punjab province where they faced blasphemy charges after allegedly distributing Christian pamphlets. According to reports, two unidentified gunmen shot dead Pastor Rashid Emmanuel and his brother Sajjad, and left their police escort critically wounded, as they were leaving the court following a hearing.=============

This is for the questioning Christians who need to understand what happens when Sharia IS the country.

We did drop the criminal charges against the security guards last year. What did that do? Did people generally say, "That was a gracious thing you did. I think you did the right thing." No. Did anyone even mention that gesture of good will this year? To my knowledge only David, Nabeel, and I mentioned it. To the contrary, now I've heard people say, "Well, you must have been wrong last year since you didn't press charges."

People are saying we must have been wrong because we were hit by security guards. By this reasoning, I'm not sure anyone would find it a gracious gesture if these gentlemen did not file a lawsuit. There is some funky reasoning going on. As the professor of philosophy at USC, Dallas Willard, stated, "Bluntly, to serve God well we must think straight; and crooked thinking, intentional or not, always favors evil."

The argument to not pursue the civil lawsuit as a gesture of good will is not substantiated in my experience.

I agree Mary completely. The reason I was asking David about the situation is because I understand that lawsuits can be very long drawn out processes. I was contemplating the possibility of the judge in the district court dismissing the case because of an apparent bias, whereby the decision would go through appeals, to a supreme court, etc etc. I pray for a quick and decisive verdict that will vindicate the Lord's faithful workers and our dear fellow members in the Lord.

David I just want to say that your team is an inspiration to myself and other Christians around the world. Your work is raising up many Christians desiring to spread the word to muslims.

May the Lord preserve you brother, Nabeel, Sam, and others in a most worthy and noble cause.

Ok guys, here's an interesting quote from Josh McDowell on his youtube page. Let's see just how inviting and tolerant the muslim authorities were toward Christians at the festival:

"Proselytizing was not permitted within the festival. More Than a Carpenter was passed out outside the festival. Hopefully, from reading The Witness which was given out within the festival, their appetites were whetted for knowing﻿ more. They then had the opportunity to request additional material.JoshMcDowell"

So you can pay money to set up a booth at the festival and not be allowed to preach Christ at your booth. Keep in mind this was an Arab festival, not an Islamic Festival, but I guess at the end of the day, what's in a name?

We all hope that it doesn't go to criminal trial, and I for one hope that y'all also successfully sue the pants off 'em.

But if it should go to trial, I wonder if it would be worth petitioning for a change of venue. There's ample documentation even aside from the arrest (which maybe couldn't be used for the purpose) of bias in the city of Dearborn. There's the comment about loving Dearborn police, for example. There are the people cheering when you are arrested. There's the fact that the mayor and city have made statements on the Internet already about this, thus indicating city solidarity about you and biasing opinion within the city. This is entirely my non-lawyerly opinion, but it just occurs to me that asking for a change of venue might be a good idea. Even if the proposal for change of venue was denied, that might itself constitute grounds for an appeal in the (insane) event of a conviction based on lack of due process.

Ok guys, here's an interesting quote from Josh McDowell on his youtube page. Let's see just how inviting and tolerant the muslim authorities were toward Christians at the festival:

"Proselytizing was not permitted within the festival. More Than a Carpenter was passed out outside the festival. Hopefully, from reading The Witness which was given out within the festival, their appetites were whetted for knowing﻿ more. They then had the opportunity to request additional material.JoshMcDowell"

Hogan replies:

Now the truth is coming out and falsehood exposed.

How many Muslims and these so called Christian Sharia sympathizers were not referring to Dearborn's openess to Josh McDowell.

Now contrary to all these so called Christian critics the reality seems rather to back of the picture of the situation as depicted by the Acts 17 team.

By the way where are all those critics now? Where they simply Muslims in sheep skin or Christian who have been so messed by political correctness, the Jante Law and the modern trend to glorify Islam, that they were willing even to stab their own Christians and brothers in the back for the sake of defending the sharia law, persecution on Christians and the injustice of a local police department.

If these people call themselves Christians and they believe they are, what makes them sink down to such a level?

This interview of McDowell is somewhat disturbing: http://openaudiovideo.moody.edu/OSAM/OSAM/ASX/Audio/wma/Radio/WMBI-TMR/2010-06/McDowellDearbornArabFestivalEdited.asx

It's only about 5 minutes, so it won't take too long for you to listen, but there are few comments that I take to be references to Acts 17 that are either unfair or based on the unfortunate fact that he has swallowed some of the Dearborn officials' propaganda as the truth. (I'd say the latter is more probable since McDowell generally seems like a very fair-minded man.)

It also occurred to me that if he isn't exaggerating when he says that in 3 days, he autographed 9000 copies of his book af the festival (over 3000 of them personalized), this would seem to imply that almost all of his contact with the people at his booth was VERY superficial - to the extent that he'd have no way of telling (at least on the basis of his own interaction with them) if a significant part of the people who came to his booth were in fact Arab Christians (who would be on average more familiar with his name).

CC said:We did drop the criminal charges against the security guards last year. What did that do? Did people generally say, "That was a gracious thing you did. I think you did the right thing." No. Did anyone even mention that gesture of good will this year? To my knowledge only David, Nabeel, and I mentioned it. To the contrary, now I've heard people say, "Well, you must have been wrong last year since you didn't press charges."

Lupus replied:Hahahah. So you don't believe in the turn-the-other-cheek commandment. Or is it the case that you have interpreted the commandment in such a way so it fits your particular temprament and inclination towards retaliation.

"David,Why is the mayor publicly committing himself to statements that are so obviously refuted by your videos? Isn't he shooting himself in the foot that way? Is it possible he has never seen your videos, and has incompetent or lying witnesses and advisers feeding him erroneous explanations of what took place with Acts 17 at the festival? Why would he intentionally and publicly lie, when there is video evidence to refute such lies?"

I have heard from some local friends (West Michigan) that something happened prior to the first arrest that caused the Criminal Complaint. I've heard it from 2 different people without any evidence. Just wondering if you guys could shed any light on this. From what I could gather, it had to do with a muslim being intimidated and a christen vendor backing up the report.

I'm very much struck, by the way, by McDowell's saying that "proselytizing" wasn't allowed within the festival area! I mean, wow. Just wow. And here I thought the rule was supposed to be, "No Christian conversations with Muslims except at booths." Now it turns out you aren't allowed to witness to people even at the booths! Just sign copies of your book, I guess. And McDowell just accepts this as the price of doing business? Where does he think he's working, Saudi Arabia?

When Christians, ostensibly trying to reach others for Christ, accept the notion that witnessing can be called "proselytizing," demonized accordingly, and restricted as a form of speech in public places within the United States, the church is in big trouble.

"The police command center received a complaint, from a Christian volunteer working the festival, regarding members of Acts 17 Apologetics harassing and intimidating patrons of the festival and that a large crowd was gathering.

I think this JUDAS should be outed. You have his name in the police report. It makes me want to vomit.

The Fat Man wrote:"The police command center received a complaint, from a Christian volunteer working the festival, regarding members of Acts 17 Apologetics harassing and intimidating patrons of the festival and that a large crowd was gathering.

I think this JUDAS should be outed. You have his name in the police report. It makes me want to vomit."

I seriously doubt someone came up to the police and said, "I'm a Christian and I think what those guys are doing is illegal"....and even someone did, did the police ask for "proof" that the person is a true Christian (which there wouldn't be any "hard proof" - that's why Paul tells us to examine ourselves to ensure we are in the beloved)...at the very "best", the report could have said, "A self-identified Christian volunteer complained...", but even then - i mean seriously, what's the purpose of putting that in, except for P.R. purposes. I also doubt that if it were a Muslim, they would have put in their report, "A Muslim volunteer complained..."

While you are "hahaha"ing...why don't you exegete the "turn the other cheek" passage. You have made an accusation, and by the way you have accused someone of misinterpreting the passage you are making a claim to have a 'correct' understanding of this Scripture. Go for it bud...let's see your exegesis...

Nabeel Qureshi said..."We know who it was who filed the complaint, and we have video footage of what he complained about. Are you guys shocked by what you've seen so far? It only gets... shockier. :-)"

Thanks for responding to my post about offering to not bring a civil suit if the charges are dropped. From your responses I can see that I need to clarify some things.

Firstly, I am not, as you probably assumed from my "name", a Muslim. Rather, I am an American Christian (the name means "Servant of the Lion"). I live in an extremist Muslim country under Shariah Law and I am a church planter. So I spend every day of my life dealing with the implications that Shariah has on religious freedom for non-Muslims! And I am also appalled at the thought of any hint of religious discrimination against Christians because of it, which is why I have been praying for you guys since this happened. Indeed, I have been praying also for the Constitution to be upheld - if you can't preach the Gospel freely in America, where can you? I don't want America to go the way of the country I live in either! See my blog post here: http://muslimministry.blogspot.com/2010/07/what-in-america.html

Secondly, I too was a bit unnerved by McDowell's video which seemed to make not-so-subtle hints that you guys were the problem. I totally disagree with him. I have no problem with his approach, and I have no problem with your approach. The reason your approach is more threatening is because you actually have MBB's (Nabeel, etc.) among your group, and because you are actively seeking to talk about the real issues and not just be all gentle about it. The fact is, there is a time for both approaches.

Which leads me to my final point... I agree that there is a time for boldness and for making points - thus displaying the zeal of Christ. I also know that there is a time when we have the chance to display the forgiveness and gentleness of Christ. Why do you feel the need to "make an example" of the city of Dearborn? - especially when the videos which are all over the internet clearly show that the city has already been made an example of - an example of wrongdoing and lying!

I also cherish the freedoms of our Constitution - something that my MBB friends in my country can only dream of. But does there come a point when "being right" according to the constitution trumps an awe-inspiring, jaw-dropping example of God's grace (grace = undeserved favor)? The city does not deserve you to offer this. We didn't deserve for Christ to die for us. Legally, according to God's Constitution, we were dead wrong. But it was precisely when we were dead wrong that Christ died for us to offer shocking grace and win our hearts to him. If you win the case or lawsuit, you might legally win, but the hearts of many will not be with you. But if you make such a shocking offer of grace, to not bring a suit if they drop the charges, you may very will win the hearts of those same people.

I cannot speak for what legal actions Acts 17 will do, but I, for one, think they *should* pursue a lawsuit against the City of Dearborn. And this is why: what you think should be perceived as "the forgiveness and gentleness of Christ" will not be perceived that way, but as permission for this to happen again (for a third time). As Mary Jo pointed out, they took this approach last year, and no one commended Jesus for their forgiveness or gentleness in Christ. In fact, people had quite the opposite reaction, so there is just no reason to throw these pearls down again.

To clarify, the conflict is not between persons, but between four people and the City of Dearborn (government) via the Dearborn Police Department (institution). One cannot really show a government institution the kind of compassion you are asking for, because it is a system that is working against four people fueled by corrupt people in authority. I'm pretty sure David and Nabeel don't have anything against the Mayor personally; they only want to make right what was done to them and to stop future false arrests in similar situations.

We cannot know what the reaction will be of people should Acts 17 win such a lawsuit. It may well be that many will harden their hearts against Christianity, but at the same time, God is at work. Some may come to have a more favorable view of Christianity, because some Christians showed confidence in their Christian integrity and stood up for what was right. In a long run, their successful lawsuit may do more good for Dearborn than what could be accomplished in the immediate future by ensuring that the Gospel can be preached without fear of the police from here on out.

"We know who it was who filed the complaint, and we have video footage of what he complained about. Are you guys shocked by what you've seen so far? It only gets... shockier.":-)

Ok, its not Nadir Ahmed was it? Was it? Was it? He was at the festival you know. I saw him lurking. Yahya Snow perhaps? Yahya would do something like that, don't you think; No? He sneeks right up on you like that y'know. Responding2Christians? I liked that guy;-} Oh, 1moremuslim, No? WHO WAS IT MAN; THE SUSPENSE IS KILLING ME! Its like the end of a soap opera where they leave it hanging. Stop it! Just stop it man!

Abdul, I did not assume that you were Muslim, but I do disagree with you. Listen: You say that you agree that it would be terrible if freedom of religion were lost in America. Let me tell you, that is why Acts 17 must press all legal avenues here to have the city rebuked by lawful authority and told that they cannot do this anymore. Otherwise, freedom of religion _will_ be eroded and eventually lost in America! We cannot keep our freedoms in America if we do not use lawful avenues to uphold them. If we don't do so, others will simply take those freedoms away, as is happening in Dearborn.

If you realize the importance of freedom to preach Jesus Christ in America, then you should please take our word for it that this freedom will not be upheld if Acts 17 gives in on this and refuses to press a suit against the city.

Please notice that _already_ the city has set up a rule, which people like Josh McDowell are following, of no witnessing for the Lord Jesus Christ (which they call "proselytizing") within the festival. That's just absolutely shocking that this could happen in America. It's utterly, utterly unconstitutional that the police should uphold such a rule and that Christians should submit to it. And wherever such things are not challenged, they simply expand, as witness the rule against passing out the Gospel of John within five blocks of the festival area. What will it be next? No witnessing in certain areas of Dearborn at _any_ time of year?

These things must be stopped by invoking the freedoms we have under American law or they will simply grow and spread, as is happening in Dearborn.

Meanwhile, Christians who do convert will be increasingly persecuted and, as is already happening in England, they will not be duly protected by the authorities from their relatives.

I'm thinking of blogging about that comment of McDowell's about how "proselytizing was not permitted at the festival." I'm trying to get the timeline right here, since that comment at youtube appears to have been made four months ago. So does this mean that sickening "Sharia Love" video on which the comment appears was made concerning last year's festival? I don't quite get how this comment could have been made four months ago. It must be about the previous festival, right?

Yes you're right. That is what initially stumped me. The question then becomes if the Christians were not allowed to preach the gospel at last year's festival, do you think the policy would have changed for 2010?

It's amazing that Christians paid money to basically set up booths where they could only distribute their books. No gospel preaching allowed.

Instead of distributing 3000 signed NOVELS, Mr. McDowell should have distributed 3,000 bibles.

In any case, if book distribution is allowed, then why the need to even set up a booth? Why not just hand bibles out to people?

But yeah, no gospel preaching allowed. What really gets me is how in one of his videos he is specifically praising the MAYOR and CHIEF of police.

Royal Son, I've blogged about the McDowell situation at What's Wrong with the World. I gave you a hat tip for the info. about the "no witnessing" rule.

I can answer your question about getting a booth to pass out literature: Under current Supreme Court precedents it is not a violation of the First Amendment for people to be limited to passing out literature at a booth at a fair. That's why David and Nabeel, who didn't want to be corralled at a booth, didn't pass out any literature within the festival grounds.

What I didn't know is that this additional and utterly _un_constitutional rule had been added: No witnessing at the festival, even at a booth.

Lydia et al., I did not realize that Acts 17 had already let the 2009 incident slide (i.e. they had already shown grace). Again, I am overseas, so I am not up on things Stateside. I understand if you guys feel the time is right to press forward with this. But my only advice is to do it in as much love and grace as possible alongside the truth.Blessings, Abdul

Women in Islam

American Freedom Law Center

America

The Truth about CAIR

FAQ Page

On this website, we engage Muslims and the foundations of Islam without trying to be "PC". We feel honesty is better than disguised language. As you can read on our FAQ, this is out of love, not out of hatred. Thanks, and we're looking forward to seeing your comments!